A spokesperson for the file sharing company says that RapidShare has no reason …

While customers of Megaupload, both legitimate and otherwise, try to figure out where to turn next, other file sharing companies are ready to step up to fill in the gaps—at least for legal uses. And RapidShare, the next largest "digital locker" service, claims to be unconcerned about the MegaUpload case's precedent. But the case could have a broad impact on companies that offer storage as part of their services, depending on the outcome.

"We're not concerned or scared about the raid," Daniel Raimer, a spokesperson for RapidShare, told Ars in a phone interview. "File hosting itself is a legitimate business."

If a manager of a bank got arrested for money laundering, he said, it wouldn't lead to the shut-down of all banks. And he said Microsoft's SkyDrive and other cloud data storage and backup services," from a technical standpoint are doing what we do."

In a statement, RapidShare's CEO Alexandra Zwingli enumerated the ways in which RapidShare is different from Megaupload, pointing out first that RapidShare is set up in a much more transparent way than the Mega empire, and under the actual names of its founders. "RapidShare AG was founded in Switzerland and in fact, it was always located at the address given in the company details and was always run under real names without any anonymous intermediate businesses. The radical measures against Megaupload were apparently required since the situation there had been totally different."

Zwingli said RapidShare is "an absolutely legal service—like Swisscom or YouTube", with services comparable to Dropbox, and doesn't offer a rewards system like Megaupload did for frequently downloaded files. "We act rigidly against copyright infringement," Zwingli asserted, and added that the company has "established a constructive dialogue with politics and society in the United States and in other countries."

Raimer said the MegaUpload raid wasn't about file sharing itself, but the alleged criminal actions of the company's staff. "As far as I can tell, the allegations are based on their closed eyes to the pirate scene, and that they financially supported (pirates) and uploaded infringing content themselves. If they turn out to be true, then law enforcement had to go this way."

Frank Kenney, the vice president of global strategy for Ipswitch File Transfer (a company that provides a managed file transfer service for corporate users) and former analyst at Gartner, told Ars that he believes that the Megaupload case will create issues for companies like RapidShare—and anyone else who offers online storage as part of their services. "The question will be," he said, "how on the hook are these companies because they don't look at what their customers upload or download?" He said that the impact of the Megaupload case may be further reaching than SOPA and PIPA may have been if they had been enacted.

While sites such as RapidShare and FileServe offer unlimited storage and high-speed downloads, Dropbox and other companies more focused on point-to-point file sharing and synchronization discourage using their services for piracy by charging large premium rates for bigger storage (about $200 a year for 100 gigabytes, and $795 a year for their unlimited "team" account) and by throttling the amount of bandwidth allowed for downloads of files. But Kenney said DropBox and cloud backup services like Carbonite could still find themselves forced to deal with issues over content.

Kenney also pointed out that among the alleged pirated content on Megaupload, there were likely significant amounts of corporate content being shared for legitimate reasons that is now lost or exposed by government seizure. Of course, Kenney's company is in a position to benefit from those concerns. Ipswitch's product is intended to replace services like Dropbox for corporate use, by allowing companies to host it themselves and add features like data loss prevention and other safeguards to prevent the accidental leakage of sensitive data by employees.

These companies are protected by the Safe Harbor provisions of the DMCA. As long as they comply with those provisions, they should be fine.

Megaupload, if the allegations are true, violated the shit out of those provisions. They weren't just storing copywritten material; they were downloading it themselves, helping pirates financially, and other things.

Right now, rapidshare is probably in a pretty good mood. Their biggest competition just got busted... but I have to say that rapidshare hosts just as much copyrighted material as megaupload.. They are just too dumb to realize they are next..

Frank Kenney, the vice president of global marketing for Ipswitch File Transfer (a company that provides a managed file transfer service for corporate users) and former analyst at Gartner, told Ars that he believes that the Megaupload case will create issues for companies like RapidShare—and anyone else who offers online storage as part of their services. "The question will be," he said, "how on the hook are these companies because they don't look at what their customers upload or download?"

Rapidshare's days are numbered. The way I see it, if your site is synonymous with obtaining pirated content in the mind of most of your users, you have reason to be concerned. The content owners will go after the big sites, and allow more obscure players to stay in business so long as they don't grow too large.

It is great that some still think Rapidshare is that relevant, hopefully that way all the attention will be directed to them instead of to the real current players.

Couldn't have said it better myself. It's always been this way though. When a big one like rapidshare or hotfile stops being used, a bunch of others will pop up in no time that communities will switch to.

The issue is that the process has nothing to do with the DCMA or the law. The rights holders just complained to the justice department and the site gets taken down, operators are arrested. There is no due process, the law is irrelevant. If the MPAA thinks that RapidShare looks in any way like MegaUpload, they will be taken out.

The issue is that the process has nothing to do with the DCMA or the law. The rights holders just complained to the justice department and the site gets taken down, operators are arrested. There is no due process, the law is irrelevant. If the MPAA thinks that RapidShare looks in any way like MegaUpload, they will be taken out.

I don't think you've read the contents of the indictment. Perhaps you should. They have copies of emails between the directors of megaupload and forum admins. They also have evidence they did not comply with DMCA requests one year after they were made, repeatedly. The exact same files.

The issue is that the process has nothing to do with the DCMA or the law. The rights holders just complained to the justice department and the site gets taken down, operators are arrested. There is no due process, the law is irrelevant. If the MPAA thinks that RapidShare looks in any way like MegaUpload, they will be taken out.

Read the indictment. There was quite a lot of "process" involved, more than was likely due. And the very filing of an indictment is also part of this "due process." Talking about "due process" without actually having a single clue as to what it means does not make you some constitutionally-aware hipster, it just makes you look retarded.

The issue is that the process has nothing to do with the DCMA or the law. The rights holders just complained to the justice department and the site gets taken down, operators are arrested. There is no due process, the law is irrelevant. If the MPAA thinks that RapidShare looks in any way like MegaUpload, they will be taken out.

Why did you conveniently ignore the fact that the Megaupload take down was after a two year investigation involving multiple countries and agencies where it seems a number of real factors invalidating safe harbor provisions is in play? Is it just easier to spew hyperbole than truth? Nobody has been jailed, a trial is now in order. If evidence doesn't show what the DoJ says, the DoJ and other agencies might face some severe repercussions. Till then, let's not act like the **AA's said sick-em and that's all that was required. I thought due process was what everyone wanted in place of stuff like SOPA/PIPA.

The issue is that the process has nothing to do with the DCMA or the law. The rights holders just complained to the justice department and the site gets taken down, operators are arrested. There is no due process, the law is irrelevant. If the MPAA thinks that RapidShare looks in any way like MegaUpload, they will be taken out.

Why did you conveniently ignore the fact that the Megaupload take down was after a two year investigation involving multiple countries and agencies where it seems a number of real factors invalidating safe harbor provisions is in play? Is it just easier to spew hyperbole than truth? Nobody has been jailed, a trial is now in order. If evidence doesn't show what the DoJ says, the DoJ and other agencies might face some severe repercussions. Till then, let's not act like the **AA's said sick-em and that's all that was required. I thought due process was what everyone wanted in place of stuff like SOPA/PIPA.

Well said. If we start defending sites like MegaUpload, we hurt our credibility when speaking out against SOPA/PIPA and similarly legislation.

Rapidshare's days are numbered. The way I see it, if your site is synonymous with obtaining pirated content in the mind of most of your users, you have reason to be concerned. The content owners will go after the big sites, and allow more obscure players to stay in business so long as they don't grow too large.

my past google searches support the fact they hold loads of copyrighted material, or at least what appear to be those materials.

i am not sure i have never completed a download from rapidshare and honestly thought the site might be a sham on the whole.

It is great that some still think Rapidshare is that relevant, hopefully that way all the attention will be directed to them instead of to the real current players.

Couldn't have said it better myself. It's always been this way though. When a big one like rapidshare or hotfile stops being used, a bunch of others will pop up in no time that communities will switch to.

Pop away, they'll still have to deal with the same problems, technical and otherwise that the big sites do. There's a reason a lot of them have their hands out.

The issue is that the process has nothing to do with the DCMA or the law. The rights holders just complained to the justice department and the site gets taken down, operators are arrested. There is no due process, the law is irrelevant. If the MPAA thinks that RapidShare looks in any way like MegaUpload, they will be taken out.

Read the indictment. There was quite a lot of "process" involved, more than was likely due. And the very filing of an indictment is also part of this "due process." Talking about "due process" without actually having a single clue as to what it means does not make you some constitutionally-aware hipster, it just makes you look retarded.

Is it too much to ask to have an adversarial hearing before consequences occur?

The issue is that the process has nothing to do with the DCMA or the law. The rights holders just complained to the justice department and the site gets taken down, operators are arrested. There is no due process, the law is irrelevant. If the MPAA thinks that RapidShare looks in any way like MegaUpload, they will be taken out.

Read the indictment. There was quite a lot of "process" involved, more than was likely due. And the very filing of an indictment is also part of this "due process." Talking about "due process" without actually having a single clue as to what it means does not make you some constitutionally-aware hipster, it just makes you look retarded.

Is it too much to ask to have an adversarial hearing before consequences occur?

The issue is that the process has nothing to do with the DCMA or the law. The rights holders just complained to the justice department and the site gets taken down, operators are arrested. There is no due process, the law is irrelevant. If the MPAA thinks that RapidShare looks in any way like MegaUpload, they will be taken out.

I will agree with you.I do not trust our Government one bit.Nor do I care at the moment that MEGA hosted both legal and illegal files.All of us have just seen just how much bullshit is going on in Washington and how they have even been caught in a bunch of lies of their own creation.And there are more of these kind of Cyber Locker Services with legal and illegal stuff.ICE has taken down sites and done whatever they can to not give those sites back to the owners.No due process of law there.So FRak You Washington & Big Content cause right now I don't give a krap about either of you.I will care about the not so Saintly Mega over you anyday.Sorry but that is what I say.

The issue is that the process has nothing to do with the DCMA or the law. The rights holders just complained to the justice department and the site gets taken down, operators are arrested. There is no due process, the law is irrelevant. If the MPAA thinks that RapidShare looks in any way like MegaUpload, they will be taken out.

Read the indictment. There was quite a lot of "process" involved, more than was likely due. And the very filing of an indictment is also part of this "due process." Talking about "due process" without actually having a single clue as to what it means does not make you some constitutionally-aware hipster, it just makes you look retarded.

Is it too much to ask to have an adversarial hearing before consequences occur?

An adversarial hearing for an arrest and seizure warrant? That would be highly impractical. On the other hand, there most definitely will be an adversarial hearing before any of them are convicted of crimes. Unless they plea.

Obviously you're not going to have an adversarial hearing for an arrest.The domain seizure was punitive and should not have been executed without an adversarial hearing. A domain name is not evidence of any crime.

Obviously you're not going to have an adversarial hearing for an arrest.The domain seizure was punitive and should not have been executed without an adversarial hearing. A domain name is not evidence of any crime.

No more punitive than seizing the rest of the company's assets, or arresting all their executives. I'm pretty sure the domain is the last thing the executives are crying about.

The issue is that the process has nothing to do with the DCMA or the law. The rights holders just complained to the justice department and the site gets taken down, operators are arrested. There is no due process, the law is irrelevant. If the MPAA thinks that RapidShare looks in any way like MegaUpload, they will be taken out.

Read the indictment. There was quite a lot of "process" involved, more than was likely due. And the very filing of an indictment is also part of this "due process." Talking about "due process" without actually having a single clue as to what it means does not make you some constitutionally-aware hipster, it just makes you look retarded.

Is it too much to ask to have an adversarial hearing before consequences occur?

Yes. If the police have good enough evidence to indict you for a crime (all of which does not require an "adversarial hearing"), you go to jail. Which is a consequence.

That's why getting indictments is hard; because indicting someone has consequences. The Feds did their homework, collected evidence, and convinced judges to arrest people on the basis of that evidence.

If you don't like due process, then you can lobby to have the laws that govern this process changed. Otherwise, that's how things are done.

When Bernie Madoff was arrested, his assets were seized. That's what happens; should there have been an adversarial process before taking his ill-gotten goods?

Obviously you're not going to have an adversarial hearing for an arrest.The domain seizure was punitive and should not have been executed without an adversarial hearing. A domain name is not evidence of any crime.

If it was a numbers game being run out of a barbershop by the owners of that shop, I'd expect that police action involving the numbers game would also involve closing the barbershop. Why should that be different just because it's on the internet?

The issue is that the process has nothing to do with the DCMA or the law. The rights holders just complained to the justice department and the site gets taken down, operators are arrested. There is no due process, the law is irrelevant.

The indictment against MegaUpload came out of a presentation to a federal grand jury. That does not happen overnight.

Quote:

After all persons other than the grand jury members have left the room, the foreperson willask the grand jury members to discuss and vote upon the question of whether the evidence persuadesthe grand jury that a crime has probably been committed by the person accused and that anindictment should be returned. Every grand juror has the right to express his or her view of thematter under consideration, and grand jurors should listen to the comments of all their fellow grandjurors before making up their mind. Only after each grand juror has been given the opportunity tobe heard will the vote be taken. It should be remembered that at least 16 jurors must be present and12 members must vote in favor of the indictment before it may be returned.

If Rapidshare doesn't think they're next, they're out of their tiny little minds. The Justice Department and Media industries don't think *any* file sharing service is legitimate. They didn't get SOPA/PIPA, and now they're flexing their muscle to show they didn't need it anyway.

The issue is that the process has nothing to do with the DCMA or the law. The rights holders just complained to the justice department and the site gets taken down, operators are arrested. There is no due process, the law is irrelevant. If the MPAA thinks that RapidShare looks in any way like MegaUpload, they will be taken out.

I will agree with you.I do not trust our Government one bit.Nor do I care at the moment that MEGA hosted both legal and illegal files.All of us have just seen just how much bullshit is going on in Washington and how they have even been caught in a bunch of lies of their own creation.And there are more of these kind of Cyber Locker Services with legal and illegal stuff.ICE has taken down sites and done whatever they can to not give those sites back to the owners.No due process of law there.So FRak You Washington & Big Content cause right now I don't give a krap about either of you.I will care about the not so Saintly Mega over you anyday.Sorry but that is what I say.

Your typing style makes you hard to take seriously. Getting someone to come to your view of things is all about persuasion. Not rants that make it look like you were so angry that you forgot basic grammar rules like spacing after periods.

SEC. 4. AMENDMENT TO TITLE 18, UNITED STATES CODEf)(1) If a defendant being prosecuted for a felony offense (other than offense of which an element is the false registration of a domain name) knowingly falsely registers a domain name and knowingly uses that domain name in the course of that offense, the maximum imprisonment otherwise provided by law for that offense shall be doubled or increased by 7 years, whichever is less.

DALLAS -- A federal grand jury in Dallas returned a superseding indictment this week charging 19 defendants in a massive cybercrime conspiracy, announced U.S. Attorney James T. Jacks of the Northern District of Texas.

...

Matthew Norman Simpson is also charged with one count of obstruction - destruction of evidence and one count of false registration of a domain name.

Just because a domain name isn't as materially tangible as, say, a gun used to rob a bank doesn't make it any less significant, does it? If anything, the law is trying to catch up with reality as quickly as it can.

Sean Gallagher / Sean is Ars Technica's IT Editor. A former Navy officer, systems administrator, and network systems integrator with 20 years of IT journalism experience, he lives and works in Baltimore, Maryland.